The reason is
obvious. Nowhere else was there a fusion of church and state. The people
had, therefore, no oppressive statutes to uphold, nor anything to conceal.
Provided the liberty of English subjects was secured to them they were
content to obey the English Constitution. On the other hand, Massachusetts
was a theocracy, the power of whose priesthood rested on enactments
contrary to British institutions, and which, therefore, would have been
annulled upon appeal. Hence the clerical party were wild with fear and
rage, and nerved themselves to desperate resistance.
"But alasse, sir, the commission impowering those commisioners to heare
and determine all cases whatever, ... should it take place, what would
become of our civill government which hath binn, under God, the heade of
that libertie for our consciences for which the first adventurers ... bore
all ... discouragements that encountered them ... in this wildernes."
Rather than submit, they protested they had "sooner leave our place and
all our pleasant outward injoyments." [Footnote: Court to Boyle. _Hutch.
Coll._, Prince Soc. ed. ii. 113.]
Under such conditions a direct issue was soon reached. The General Court,
in answer to the commissioners' proposals, maintained that the observance
of their charter was inconsistent with appeals; that they had already
provided an oath of allegiance; that they had conformed to his majesty's
requirements in regard to the franchise; and lastly, in relation to
toleration, there was no equivocation.
Pages:
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384